Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolution is True Because Life Needs It
rueh
Member (Idle past 3651 days)
Posts: 382
From: universal city tx
Joined: 03-03-2008


Message 160 of 188 (671015)
08-21-2012 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 156 by barnes
08-21-2012 3:12 PM


Re: Silly creationist story
Barnes writes:
How can breeding foxes i.e.; fox A, with fox B, to get fox C be remotely close to natural selection?
Because it is still selection. It is just artificial selection based on a predetermined trait that the scientists were looking for. This is an example of how selecting for one trait in the foxes phenotype, in this case behavior. Gives rise to additional changes in phenotype as expressed by morphology. If it were to occur naturally, it would be because the trait of being docile was being actively selected for in a breeding population. However whether through natural or artificial selection it is an example of how selection can lead to changes in the phenotype of a species.

'Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat'
The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.-FZ
The industrial revolution, flipped a bitch on evolution.-NOFX
It takes all kinds to make a mess- Benjamin Hoff

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by barnes, posted 08-21-2012 3:12 PM barnes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by barnes, posted 08-21-2012 3:49 PM rueh has replied

  
rueh
Member (Idle past 3651 days)
Posts: 382
From: universal city tx
Joined: 03-03-2008


Message 171 of 188 (671074)
08-22-2012 7:05 AM
Reply to: Message 163 by barnes
08-21-2012 3:49 PM


Re: Silly creationist story
Barnes writes:
I am still at a loss, the word selection assumes thought.
No, artificial selection would assume thought. Natural selection is process that is guided by whatever bestows a survival or breeding advantage. It has no ultimate plan. If it works and the animal is able to breed, than the trait is passed on to subsequent generations. If not and the animal doesn't pass on it genetic mutations, than whatever mutations that animal had ends with the animal.
What dose nature ultimately select and why haven’t we seen any advancement in what we have.
There are many examples of evolution that has been observed. For that I, as others here have, would point you to a book on biology. An actual one not just crap read off the internet. I don't have enough time to eleborate as I have to go to work. I will try to get back to this post to expand if necessary.
Has nature maid her Ultimate selection?
There is no ultimate plan. The cycle of life, breeding and death is continous. So long as that is occuring than evolution is occuring.

'Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat'
The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.-FZ
The industrial revolution, flipped a bitch on evolution.-NOFX
It takes all kinds to make a mess- Benjamin Hoff

This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by barnes, posted 08-21-2012 3:49 PM barnes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by barnes, posted 08-26-2012 4:56 PM rueh has replied

  
rueh
Member (Idle past 3651 days)
Posts: 382
From: universal city tx
Joined: 03-03-2008


(1)
Message 187 of 188 (671606)
08-28-2012 9:44 AM
Reply to: Message 172 by barnes
08-26-2012 4:56 PM


Re: Silly creationist story
What I do see in the world is adaptation. The fox through natural selection will begot, a fox, better adapted to survive in an ever changing world, the whole time never changing from a fox. The fox was Created a fox and will stay a fox, just better adapted to carry on as a fox.
That is exactly what the ToE predicts as well. It is only with the accumulation of these minor adaptations over the span of many generations that we get to something that is fox like but not what we would classify as strictly being a fox. No one (other than yourself) has advocated that we should see anything different than that. What the fox experiment shows is that selection can lead to morphological changes. If we know that an animal's morphology can change. What mechanism is there to keep these changes from accumulating in future generations, until we get something that looks like it is descended from a fox but has characteristics that an ancestral fox does not have?

'Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat'
The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.-FZ
The industrial revolution, flipped a bitch on evolution.-NOFX
It takes all kinds to make a mess- Benjamin Hoff

This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by barnes, posted 08-26-2012 4:56 PM barnes has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024